Testimony by Journalism Educator Rob Melton
Rob Melton 2607 SW Bertha Blvd. Portland, OR 97239

May 29, 2007

Testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee on HB 3279: Today I am speaking to you as a father of a child who has been censored; an Oregon journalism teacher for 27 years; a former board director of the national Journalism Education Association for 20 years; a former president of the state journalism teachers organization; a current board member of Oregon Education Association; a University of Oregon School of Journalism graduate, and a former newspaper reporter and editor.

Background I want you to know that the ideas behind HB 3279 are not unprecedented, according to Mark Goodman. He is director of the Student Press Law Center in Washington, D.C. In fact, Iowa has had such a law since 1989, Massachusetts since 1988, Kansas since 1992, and California since 1977. In each of those states, no one has ever argued that the quality of education has diminished as a result of this type of law. In fact, some observers have argued that it has strengthened the quality of education in those states.

Does this law give students more rights than others enjoy? No. HB 3279 does not create a free-for-all. It does include some very clear limits, but also it tries to return some balance between the free speech rights of students and the need of school officials to maintain an effective learning environment. This law clearly refers to the limitations upon mass media which exist in our legal system: libel, invasion of privacy, obscenity, clear and present danger, inciting unlawful acts — the very things which are taught to every high school and college journalist right after the lesson on "What is news?" and "Who is your audience?" and "How do you write a news story?" The lesson, just so you know, is always framed this way: You have rights, and with those rights come responsibilities. Thus begins a year-long discussion about what "the Fourth Estate" can do, and then whether we should do it as we discuss law and ethics in the framework of informing the public about its democratic institutions.

Does this law assure that all voices will be heard, whether moderate, conservative, progressive, green or other point of view? Yes. Students must know their voices are important, their opinions — when based on facts — valued, and their news interests validated. Having worked with high school journalists both before and after the Hazelwood decision, I have seen students either reject ideas outright when they say, "The administration would never allow us to publish that," or worse, not even mention something that was right in front of them because they "knew" it would never get published. If a story is going to get killed, it should be student journalists who kill it because they have thoroughly examined the subject, debated their concerns, and made that decision themselves, frequently with the guidance of the student media advisor. This will help restore the balance and vibrancy of a healthy, spirited student press and the intellectual freedom to power it.

Do we need such a law? Absolutely. The effect of the U.S. Supreme Court's Hazelwood decision has had a chilling effect first on the high school media, and now on the college media. Although I have a degree in journalism from the University of Oregon, experience as reporter and editor, and a license to teach with a journalism endorsement, one of my principals recently opened her administrator textbook and showed me the one paragraph summary of Hazelwood for administrators. Do you know what it said? "The principal controls the content of school publications." For any of you who have studied the Hazelwood decision, this is a shocking simplification of the ruling. The textbook said nothing else about the role students should then play in a class which is studying journalism, producing the high school newspaper, and led by a highly qualified teacher. In fact, let me tell you a story about my own son, who as a freshman at Benson Polytechnic H.S. where I teach, wrote a story about a senior who had graduated the previous year. He had committed a grisly murder. The newspaper staff learned of it from students who knew him from when he was at school. (It was later featured prominently in the local newspaper and on TV.) My son was assigned to write the story, which included reaction from students who knew him. I worked closely with the writer, my son, in the development of the story. We discussed many of the issues and ethical problems it presented. It was an opportunity for real learning to take place. The editor read it and decided it would go on page one. When the paper arrived, the vice-principal locked the papers up and refused to allow the staff to distribute them because of that story. We pleaded with him to allow us to distribute the paper, which had timely information for that day. In the meantime, the student editor called Mark Goodman, director of the Student Press Law Center, for advice. As a result of that conversation, the staff started a whisper campaign. They asked all of their friends to start asking any school official they encountered "Where's my newspaper?" Word spread like wildfire. Soon, even staff members were asking where the newspapers were. We had to wait until the principal returned on Monday afternoon, and she and I had a heated discussion over the issue. She mentioned all the people who were asking "Where is the newspaper?" She agreed to distribution the next day, but insisted on having grief counselors present for students who might be "disturbed" with the news. No students showed up for grief counseling as a result of the story my son and my staff published in the school newspaper. Mark Goodman helped us stay focused on our real goal: Getting the newspaper in the hands of our readers. Mission accomplished. Civics lesson learned. My point here is that this was a solid piece of journalism, a reaction story to something that was of concern to our audience; which, in fact, we had found out about from our readers who told us about it before it was public knowledge. Sometimes we find ourselves these days just fighting to be heard rather than studying, questioning, discussing and debating important issues of the day. But it's not just about protecting the rights of student journalists; it is also about protecting student media advisers who allow protected speech to be published. I can name for you at least five teachers in the 26 years I've been teaching journalism who were removed from teaching journalism and advising student media because they were doing their job. I am one of those teachers. (Dave Bailey, Rob Melton, Nancy Giuliani, Bob Skrondal, Janet Smith) These teachers each coached their students to win the top national awards for student media multiple times. All of us, sooner or later, ended up back in the journalism classroom. There are others, I'm sure, who didn't try to get back into it, but some of us have it in our blood. Oregon used to have bragging rights for the number of All-American high school newspapers earned — more than 45 each year. Now it's down to about a dozen. It's too risky for most teachers under the current circumstances. When the school administrators and school board organizations went to their members to find out how they felt about this bill, they heard that their districts already had more progressive policy language than that which exists in state law. In fact, the gentleman from the ACLU identified the essential issue which has prevented student journalists from having their day in court: Because a student left school before a case went before the court, the court ruled (some years ago now) that students had no legal standing and dismissed the lawsuit. In Oregon, because our Constitution protects free speech for all people (not the term "citizens"), the ACLU and others believes students already have strong constitutional protection, but students have been unsuccessful at making that case because of their legal lack of standing. (For your information, about one lawsuit is filed every year in the nation involving student free speech.) This is a good bill, long overdue. It provides students the opportunity to learn the role of free speech and mass media in a democracy, to cover the news for their readers, and gives them the legal standing they need should they choose to have their day in court; it protects student media advisers when their students publish legally protected speech; and for administrators and school boards it sets clear limits to maintain an effective learning environment. It is a win, win, win law. I urge you to support this legislation.

Sincerely,

Rob Melton

>>See the Bill

>>Testimony by HB 3279 sponsor Oregon Rep. Larry Galizio

>>Read the amendments

>>Oregonian coverage >>Listen to audio from the session

Also: Illinois introduces bill; amendments added

Graphic: See student expression attempts across the country

Related links: >>Bill would protect rights of student journalists (Oregon Daily Emerald)

>>Protecting Freedom of the Student Press in Oregon (Fire's The Torch)

>>Student Press Law Center coverage >>Modified student press bill waiting in Senate: Two parts of HB 3279 that deal with publication content removed from newest version of bill

(Daily Vanguard, Portland State University student newspaper) >>How a bill becomes law in Oregon

>>Should students be free from censorship? (Q&A with Oregon students)

>>First Amendment chair at University of Oregon supporting bill >>Oregon House of Representatives committee hears testimony

>>(listen to the testimony) >>Student Journalists seek expressive freedom (Statesman Journal) >>Track the Oregon bill (select House Bill, and enter 3279)

>>Coverage on Washington HB 1307

>>Upthegrove says he'll introduce '08 bill in Washington state

>>Seattle P-I editorial board supports student expression

>>Student Press Law Center analyzes Washington bill's journey

>>Track the Michigan bill

Other related links: •"Bong hits 4 Jesus" case heard by U.S. Supreme Court:

>>Story

>>Supreme Court testimony (pdf)

>>First Amendment Center

•State of Kansas to introduce bill to regulate student media

•Student Press Law Center consultant Mike Hiestand talks to National Public Radio on a variety of student press issues